1. Taxes, Transfers, Inequality and Poverty in Latin America Nora Lustig Tulane University Network on Inequality and Poverty, LACEA Columbia University, April 20, 2012 1

2. Commitment to Equity Project Commitment to Equity (CEQ) Initiative; Inter- American Dialogue and Tulane University’s CIPR and Dept. of Economics. Currently: 12 countries 5 finished: Argentina (2009), Bolivia (2007), Brazil (2009), Mexico (2008) and Peru (2009) (year of HH survey) 7 in progress: Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Paraguay and Uruguay 2

3. References Lustig, Nora (coordinator). “Fiscal Policy and Income Redistribution in Latin America: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom,” Argentina: Carola Pessino; Bolivia: George Gray Molina, Wilson Jimenez, Verónica Paz, Ernesto Yañez; Brazil: Claudiney Pereira, Sean Higgins; Mexico: John Scott; Peru: Miguel Jaramillo., Economics Department, Working Paper 1202, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 2012. Forthcoming. Lustig and Higgins (2012) “Fiscal Incidence, Fiscal Mobility and the Poor: a New Approach,” to be presented at Well-being and inequality in the long-run: measurement, history and ideas, Universidad Carlos III, Madrid, May 31 and June 1, 2012 3

4. Outline How much poverty reduction and redistribution LA achieves through fiscal policy? Standard Incidence Analysis/Caveats Results: – Heterogeneous LA – Little correlation between size of government and extent of redistribution – Direct Taxes, practically “useless” – Cash Transfers, can reduce poverty significantly – Indirect taxes can make poor become net payers to the government (even after cash transfers) 4

5. Conclusions First, Latin America is heterogenous; can’t talk of “a Latin America” The extent and effectiveness of income redistribution and poverty reduction, government size, and spending patterns vary significantly across countries. 5

6. Decline in Gini and Effectiveness: Heterogeneous LA 6

7. Decline in Headcount Ratio and Effectiveness: Heterogeneous LA 7

8. Conclusions Second, there is little correlation between government size and the extent and effectiveness of redistribution and poverty reduction. 8

9. 9

10. Conclusions Third, direct taxes achieve little in the form of redistribution. Caveat: The rich are excluded from analysis using household surveys; need governments to share information from tax returns (anonymous of course) as all advanced countries do (except for NIC’s) – Fiscal Transparency for Efficiency and Equity Campaign 10

11. Fiscal Policy and Decline in Gini 11

12. Conclusions Fourth, large-scale targeted cash transfers can achieve significant reductions in extreme poverty. The extent of poverty reduction depends on: – size of per capita transfer – coverage of the poor 12

13. “Leakages” to Non-poor 13

14. Coverage of the Extreme and Total Poor 14

15. Conclusions Fifth, when indirect taxes are taken into account, the moderate poor and the near poor become net payers to the fiscal system. 15

16. Impact of Indirect Taxes 16

17. Fiscally-induced Upward and Downward Movement: Brazil 17

18. Thank you 18